前庭前庭人工耳蜗植入术:探讨可行性和结果--系统性综述。

IF 1.9 3区 医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Pub Date : 2024-11-23 DOI:10.1007/s00405-024-09095-w
Nidhin Das K, Vidhu Sharma, Vishudh Mohan, Kapil Soni, Amit Goyal
{"title":"前庭前庭人工耳蜗植入术:探讨可行性和结果--系统性综述。","authors":"Nidhin Das K, Vidhu Sharma, Vishudh Mohan, Kapil Soni, Amit Goyal","doi":"10.1007/s00405-024-09095-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>While the scala tympani (ST) is usually the preferred site for electrode insertion in cochlear implantation, anatomical variations and cochlear ossification may require scala vestibuli (SV) insertion. This systematic review evaluates the feasibility, techniques, and clinical outcomes of SV insertions compared to ST insertions, focusing on their impact on auditory performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Studies on SV cochlear implantation were identified from databases like PubMed and EMBASE. The review included research articles reporting on anatomical feasibility, surgical methods, postoperative outcomes, and complications. Data extraction focused on demographic details, electrode types, insertion depths, and clinical outcomes of SV insertions. A two-stage selection process was applied, and 17 studies with 72 cases were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review covered 72 cases of SV insertions, with patients aged 18 months to 65 years. Bacterial meningitis was the leading cause of hearing loss (28%). Various electrode types were used, with insertion depths ranging from 12 to 31 mm. Approximately 75% of patients showed improved auditory performance. Complications, including vertigo and tinnitus, were reported in 10% of cases, with no significant difference between SV and ST insertions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SV cochlear implantation is a feasible and effective alternative in cases where ST is inaccessible. Auditory outcomes are comparable to ST insertions, and the technique shows promise in challenging anatomical situations such as cochlear ossification. Further studies are required to optimize surgical approaches and confirm long-term outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":11952,"journal":{"name":"European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scala vestibuli cochlear implantation: exploring feasibility and outcomes- a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Nidhin Das K, Vidhu Sharma, Vishudh Mohan, Kapil Soni, Amit Goyal\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00405-024-09095-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>While the scala tympani (ST) is usually the preferred site for electrode insertion in cochlear implantation, anatomical variations and cochlear ossification may require scala vestibuli (SV) insertion. This systematic review evaluates the feasibility, techniques, and clinical outcomes of SV insertions compared to ST insertions, focusing on their impact on auditory performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Studies on SV cochlear implantation were identified from databases like PubMed and EMBASE. The review included research articles reporting on anatomical feasibility, surgical methods, postoperative outcomes, and complications. Data extraction focused on demographic details, electrode types, insertion depths, and clinical outcomes of SV insertions. A two-stage selection process was applied, and 17 studies with 72 cases were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review covered 72 cases of SV insertions, with patients aged 18 months to 65 years. Bacterial meningitis was the leading cause of hearing loss (28%). Various electrode types were used, with insertion depths ranging from 12 to 31 mm. Approximately 75% of patients showed improved auditory performance. Complications, including vertigo and tinnitus, were reported in 10% of cases, with no significant difference between SV and ST insertions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SV cochlear implantation is a feasible and effective alternative in cases where ST is inaccessible. Auditory outcomes are comparable to ST insertions, and the technique shows promise in challenging anatomical situations such as cochlear ossification. Further studies are required to optimize surgical approaches and confirm long-term outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11952,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-024-09095-w\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-024-09095-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:虽然鼓室(ST)通常是人工耳蜗植入术中电极插入的首选部位,但解剖变异和耳蜗骨化可能需要插入前庭(SV)。本系统综述评估了 SV 植入与 ST 植入相比的可行性、技术和临床效果,重点关注其对听觉表现的影响:方法:采用 PRISMA 指南进行了系统性综述。从 PubMed 和 EMBASE 等数据库中确定了有关 SV 人工耳蜗植入的研究。综述包括报告解剖可行性、手术方法、术后效果和并发症的研究文章。数据提取的重点是 SV 植入的人口统计学细节、电极类型、插入深度和临床结果。采用两阶段筛选法,共纳入 17 项研究,72 个病例:结果:综述涵盖了 72 例 SV 插入病例,患者年龄从 18 个月到 65 岁不等。细菌性脑膜炎是听力损失的主要原因(28%)。使用了各种类型的电极,插入深度从 12 毫米到 31 毫米不等。约 75% 的患者听力有所改善。10%的病例出现了并发症,包括眩晕和耳鸣,SV和ST植入之间无明显差异:结论:对于无法植入 ST 的病例,SV 人工耳蜗植入是一种可行且有效的替代方法。听觉效果与 ST 植入术相当,而且该技术在耳蜗骨化等具有挑战性的解剖情况下显示出良好的前景。要优化手术方法并确认长期效果,还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Scala vestibuli cochlear implantation: exploring feasibility and outcomes- a systematic review.

Purpose: While the scala tympani (ST) is usually the preferred site for electrode insertion in cochlear implantation, anatomical variations and cochlear ossification may require scala vestibuli (SV) insertion. This systematic review evaluates the feasibility, techniques, and clinical outcomes of SV insertions compared to ST insertions, focusing on their impact on auditory performance.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Studies on SV cochlear implantation were identified from databases like PubMed and EMBASE. The review included research articles reporting on anatomical feasibility, surgical methods, postoperative outcomes, and complications. Data extraction focused on demographic details, electrode types, insertion depths, and clinical outcomes of SV insertions. A two-stage selection process was applied, and 17 studies with 72 cases were included.

Results: The review covered 72 cases of SV insertions, with patients aged 18 months to 65 years. Bacterial meningitis was the leading cause of hearing loss (28%). Various electrode types were used, with insertion depths ranging from 12 to 31 mm. Approximately 75% of patients showed improved auditory performance. Complications, including vertigo and tinnitus, were reported in 10% of cases, with no significant difference between SV and ST insertions.

Conclusion: SV cochlear implantation is a feasible and effective alternative in cases where ST is inaccessible. Auditory outcomes are comparable to ST insertions, and the technique shows promise in challenging anatomical situations such as cochlear ossification. Further studies are required to optimize surgical approaches and confirm long-term outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
537
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Official Journal of European Union of Medical Specialists – ORL Section and Board Official Journal of Confederation of European Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Head and Neck Surgery "European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology" publishes original clinical reports and clinically relevant experimental studies, as well as short communications presenting new results of special interest. With peer review by a respected international editorial board and prompt English-language publication, the journal provides rapid dissemination of information by authors from around the world. This particular feature makes it the journal of choice for readers who want to be informed about the continuing state of the art concerning basic sciences and the diagnosis and management of diseases of the head and neck on an international level. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology was founded in 1864 as "Archiv für Ohrenheilkunde" by A. von Tröltsch, A. Politzer and H. Schwartze.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Endoscopic ear surgery in the treatment of chronic otitis media with atelectasis. Correction: A novel olfactory sorting task. Cochlear implantation in patients with inner ear schwannomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis of audiological outcomes. Efficacy and safety of middle turbinate surgery: a systematic review. Idiopathic sudden sensorineural hearing loss after COVID-19 vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1